AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
1. SEGA discovered how serious the danger of "lazy eye" (strabismus) for children was 15 years ago after asking Stanford Research Institute at Palo Alto to study the safety of VR and buried the results: http://www.audioholics.com/news/edit...to-your-health


2. While this article only discusses kids, it is nowadays known that the eye muscle training ( orthoptics ) setups used to treat strabismus (and conversely, can induce it), which operate on the same effect that stereo 3D does (forcing convergence (stereo) different from what the default is for the subject's eyes for a given accommodation (focus)), are also effective in adults, even if somewhat less so than in children: http://www.strabismus.org/all_about_...#latetreatment

1 + 2 = if you use stereo 3D routinely and intensively, you will develop strabismus, period.


What this means is that shutterglasses+LCD TVs, VR helmets, polarized projection with passive glasses, and all autostereoscopic (no glasses) methods like Cubicvue's color filter barrier, parallax barrier, and lenticular arrays, are ALL DANGEROUS TO YOUR HEALTH unless used sparingly.


I would be surprised if we don't see class action lawsuits start popping up within years. Only displays that provide consistency between stereopsis (convergence) and accommodation (focus) are medically safe for significant usage. Since holographic and volumetric displays are not really practical, this means that only tunable focus microlens arrays and tunable focus direct retinal projection are left...
 

·
Premium Member
LG 55" C9 OLED, Yamaha RX-A660, Monoprice 5.1.2 Speakers, WMC HTPC, TiVo Bolt, X1
Joined
·
45,642 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixie /forum/post/18830900


1. SEGA discovered how serious the danger of "lazy eye" (strabismus) for children was 15 years ago after asking Stanford Research Institute at Palo Alto to study the safety of VR and buried the results: http://www.audioholics.com/news/edit...to-your-health


2. While this article only discusses kids, it is nowadays known that the eye muscle training ( orthoptics ) setups used to treat strabismus (and conversely, can induce it), which operate on the same effect that stereo 3D does (forcing convergence (stereo) different from what the default is for the subject's eyes for a given accommodation (focus)), are also effective in adults, even if somewhat less so than in children: http://www.strabismus.org/all_about_...#latetreatment

1 + 2 = if you use stereo 3D routinely and intensively, you will develop strabismus, period.


What this means is that shutterglasses+LCD TVs, VR helmets, polarized projection with passive glasses, and all autostereoscopic (no glasses) methods like Cubicvue's color filter barrier, parallax barrier, and lenticular arrays, are ALL DANGEROUS TO YOUR HEALTH unless used sparingly.

You seem to be blissfully unaware that all of the stereo viewing methods you describe above have been in use for decades in professional applications, with none of the effects you describe, period.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H /forum/post/18830916


You seem to be blissfully unaware that all of the stereo viewing methods you describe above have been in use for decades in professional applications, with none of the effects you describe, period.

You seem to be blissfully unaware of your small sample size and ignore the part of my post about using it routinely and intensively, which has not in general been the case before, but now is about to become as 3D technology spreads.


I have long been a 3D enthusiast, member of MTBS 3D, and visiting the autostereoscopic demos is the first thing I do every time I go to the SIGGRAPH conference. This is very discouraging news, but I'm not going to do the "see no evil hear no evil" blissful ignorance thing. Don't play wishful thinking with your health, folks.


Playing this down is a public disservice and the sort of thing I would expect more of Nintendo and Samsung PR departments than forum posters here!
 

·
Premium Member
LG 55" C9 OLED, Yamaha RX-A660, Monoprice 5.1.2 Speakers, WMC HTPC, TiVo Bolt, X1
Joined
·
45,642 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixie /forum/post/18830925


You seem to be blissfully unaware of your small sample size and ignore the part of my post about using it routinely and intensively, which has not in general been the case before, but now is about to become as 3D technology spreads.

My first exposure to professional 3D was in 1994, and the companies I've worked for have been exhibitors showing 3D technology at Siggraph many times since then. I was directly responsible for installation and integration of the first commercial CAVE (3D virtual reality) system on the Siggraph show floor.


I've worked with countless individuals that used 3D every day for more than a decade, again with zero incidence of what you describe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #5

Quote:
I've worked with countless individuals that used 3D every day for more than a decade, again with zero incidence of what you describe.

So you followed up with most of these people over a period of several years, and performed some eye exams to determine their continued good vision?


I doubt most of them compare to the typical hadcore gamer of today--and there are many millions of them, unfortunately--who would play for many hours non-stop. Bring 3D to consoles and every TV, and it's going to be lots more business for eye doctors in a few years.
 

·
Premium Member
LG 55" C9 OLED, Yamaha RX-A660, Monoprice 5.1.2 Speakers, WMC HTPC, TiVo Bolt, X1
Joined
·
45,642 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixie /forum/post/18830955


So you followed up with most of these people over a period of several years, and performed some eye exams to determine their continued good vision?

I've been working with them since 1994, and since they depended on high visual acuity it would be obvious if they developed symptoms like you've described. None of them did, out of literally thousands of end users.

Quote:
I doubt most of them compare to the typical hadcore gamer of today--and there are many millions of them, unfortunately--who would play for many hours non-stop.

No, they are not typical hardcore gamers. They are professionals in manufacturing, oil & gas, education, medical research, etc., who have used stereo shutter glasses, HMD's, passive polarized glasses, and auto stereo displays, every day, hours and hours every day, for years.


My point is this: The number of existing 3D users is a lot larger than you are aware of. Their experience is much more extensive than you are aware of. Real world experience shows the actual number of 3D viewers that have any problems, discomfort, or other negative reactions is very, very, very small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,521 Posts
While I firmly believe that there could be 'side effects' to viewing too much 3D content there are visual problems that arise from staring at a computer screen for 8 hours a day or hand/wrist issues from using a kb/m 24/7-365 or becoming obese from eating too much, almost anything done in excess can be harmful to ones health in some manner (breathing in all the crud in our air is bad for your health, as is eating processed foods). Many of the things we enjoy most in life are not healthy or safe if done in excess, but just as anything else we all need to practice some common sense, and a little goes a long way
.


That said I too know people that have used 3D for years and have suffered no ill effect, granted they are not using it 24/7.


*Oh and VR is not the same as current 3D, there are many technical differences.


Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
454 Posts
I love these sort of scare mongering threads on 3D. They are almost always full of speculative nonsense based on opinions and not much in the way of firm scientific evidence derive from actual studies. Some actual valid data to support these health damaging claims would be a good start!


We had this same level of BS when cell phones first came on the scene, loads of ridiculous rumours that we would all end up with brain tumours. All total nonsense of course and here we are a decade later still using them on a daily basis without any of the apparent side effects the luddites claimed we would suffer.


Some things never change do they?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
From a study called "Side Effects of Virtual Environments: A Review of the Literature", by the Australian Department Of Defence.
Quote:
Problems of stress on the visual system have been most obvious in HMDs. While poor engineering design or incorrect calibration for the user can be a source of visual stress, a problem less easy to avoid is the challenge to the accommodation-vergence cross-links. Current stereoscopic VR displays provide an illusion of depth by providing each eye with a separate 2D image on a fixed focal plane. The mechanisms of binocular vision fuse the images to give the 3D illusion. Because there is no image blur, the eyes must make a constant accommodative effort. But at the same time the images stimulate a changing vergence angle with changes in apparent depth, so that the normal cross-linked relationship between the systems is disrupted [Mon-Williams & Wann 1998]. The problem is not limited to HMDs as any stereoscopic display, from a stereoscopic desktop to immersive systems such as the CAVE, uses the same display method [Wann & Mon-Williams 1997]. Within certain limits the visual system can adapt, as shown by results of orthoptic exercises and of adaptation to different prisms placed in front of each eye. However, whether the changes are long term or whether there can be dual adaptation to both the real and virtual environments has not been established [Rushton & Riddell 1999].

What has been shown in several studies is that short-term exposure to VEs with stereoscopic displays has produced changes in heterophoria (latent squint), where the visual axes of the eyes deviate from their usual position. The resting vergence angle of the eyes may be altered either in the direction of exophoria (turning outwards of the eyes) or esophoria (turning inwards of the eyes). Some decrements in visual acuity have also been reported. These objective changes, which must be assessed using orthoptic instruments, are associated with reports of subjective symptoms such as blurred vision, headaches, eyestrain or momentary diplopia (double vision). The degree of objective change and the symptomatology also depended upon the VR system or VE being evaluated [Costello & Howarth 1996; Mon-Williams & Wann 1998; Mon-Williams et al. 1993]. The reported changes in heterophoria could account at least in part for the subjective symptoms as well as reduced visual acuity and reduced perception of depth when relying on stereopsis. These changes are similar to those reported with the use of NVGs and thought responsible for the reduced depth perception [Sheehy & Wilkinson 1989]. While the observed changes associated with VE exposure have usually been short-lived, it should be noted that the actual time spent immersed in the VE was short (often only 10 to 20 minutes). Whether longer exposure times produce greater or longer-lasting changes is still unknown. Certainly longer exposures in flight simulators result in greater severity of symptoms overall [Kennedy, Stanney, & Dunlap 2000].
http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/ds...-1419%20PR.pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Those VR glasses and other types of 3D presentation are not comparable at all. . . Having an image 1" from your eye for a prolonged period of time is what would cause lazy eye, not 3D stuff in general. Of course, attempting to look at *anything* (like a book, or whatever) that close for an extended period would do the same thing. Watching TV at a reasonable distance or a movie at a theater removes that issue. All that would remain is the eye strain associated with a flickering image and blinking less, but we've know about that for years.


If anything, watching things in 3D should improve stereo vision rather than harm it, since your brain and eyes must work together properly in order to create the fused "3D" image.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
I can't read what you wrote, my strabismus is acting up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
8:13's post is an important contribution and establishes beyond a doubt that there is a very serious concern. I have made extra highlights:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8:13 /forum/post/18832593


Problems of stress on the visual system have been most obvious in HMDs. While poor engineering design or incorrect calibration for the user can be a source of visual stress, a problem less easy to avoid is the challenge to the accommodation-vergence cross-links. Current stereoscopic VR displays provide an illusion of depth by providing each eye with a separate 2D image on a fixed focal plane. The mechanisms of binocular vision fuse the images to give the 3D illusion. Because there is no image blur, the eyes must make a constant accommodative effort. But at the same time the images stimulate

a changing vergence angle with changes in apparent depth, so that the normal cross-linked relationship between the systems is disrupted [Mon-Williams & Wann 1998]. The problem is not limited to HMDs as ANY stereoscopic display, from a stereoscopic desktop to immersive systems such as the CAVE, uses the same display method [Wann & Mon-Williams 1997]. Within certain limits the visual system can adapt, as shown by results of orthoptic exercises and of adaptation to different prisms placed in front of each eye. However, whether the changes are long term or whether there can be dual adaptation to both the real and virtual environments has not been established [Rushton & Riddell 1999].

What has been shown in SEVERAL STUDIES is that short-term exposure to VEs with stereoscopic displays has produced changes in heterophoria (latent squint), where the visual axes of the eyes deviate from their usual position. The resting vergence angle of the eyes may be altered either in the direction of exophoria (turning outwards of the eyes) or esophoria (turning inwards of the eyes). Some decrements in visual acuity have also been reported.These objective changes, which must be assessed using orthoptic instruments, are associated with reports of subjective symptoms such as blurred vision, headaches, eyestrain or momentary diplopia (double vision). The degree of objective change and the symptomatology also depended upon the VR system or VE being evaluated [Costello & Howarth 1996; Mon-Williams & Wann 1998; Mon-Williams et al. 1993]. The reported changes in heterophoria could account at least in part for the subjective symptoms as well as reduced visual acuity and reduced perception of depth when relying on stereopsis. These changes are similar to those reported with the use of NVGs and thought responsible for the reduced depth perception [Sheehy & Wilkinson 1989]. While the observed changes associated with VE exposure have usually been short-lived, it should be noted that the actual time spent immersed in the VE was short (often only 10 to 20 minutes). Whether longer exposure times produce greater or longer-lasting changes is still unknown. Certainly longer exposures in flight simulators result in greater severity of symptoms overall [Kennedy, Stanney, & Dunlap 2000].

http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/ds...-1419%20PR.pdf


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Abell /forum/post/18832986


Those VR glasses and other types of 3D presentation are not comparable at all. . . Having an image 1" from your eye for a prolonged period of time is what would cause lazy eye, not 3D stuff in general.

Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? Did you miss the part of the paper quote that says "The problem is not limited to HMDs as ANY stereoscopic display, from a stereoscopic desktop to immersive systems such as the CAVE, uses the same display method"?


Or maybe you fail basic geometry, since convergence is an angular measure, not distance!! A stereo image 1" from the eyes uses a much lower horizontal separation than does one on a screen few feet in front, yet both would have the same angular separation for the same 3D effect.


Or maybe you failed to read the part that says that the issue is "accommodation-vergence cross-links", which has no **** to do with distance from your eyes, but with the very thing I've been talking about from the first post!


Apologies for all the exclamation marks, but such an ignorant response that makes already refuted points contributes absolutely nothing and appears like little more than an attempt to muddy the argument, the best you can do when you fail to provide an actual logical counterargument!
 

·
Premium Member
LG 55" C9 OLED, Yamaha RX-A660, Monoprice 5.1.2 Speakers, WMC HTPC, TiVo Bolt, X1
Joined
·
45,642 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixie /forum/post/18833156


8:13's post is an important contribution and establishes beyond a doubt that there is a very serious concern. I have made extra highlights:

Be as concerned as you want, but you neglected the conclusions of that section, and the summary and conclusions of the entire report.

Quote:
However, whether the changes are long term or whether there can be dual adaptation to both the real and virtual environments has not been established
Quote:
Whether longer exposure times produce greater or longer-lasting changes is still unknown.
Quote:
7. Summary and Conclusions

Cybersickness, the result of unintended side effects of participation in VEs, is a complex problem that can reduce the effectiveness of VEs and cause potential health and safety problems. It has symptoms in common with motion sickness, and both symptoms and dimensions in common with simulator sickness (which may be considered as an example of cybersickness) and other visually induced motion sickness (VIMS). The diverse symptoms can be grouped into three dimensions: nausea or stomach discomfort, disorientation or postural instability, and oculomotor effects (eyestrain or blurred vision). The most commonly accepted causes of cybersickness are the sensory and perceptual mismatches that occur between the visual and vestibular systems. Although rival theories of causation exist, none explains all the complex data on motion, simulator and cybersickness. Cybersickness has been described not just as polysymptomatic, but also as polygenic [Kennedy, Lane, et al. 1993], due to the diversity of both causative factors and symptoms. Factors influencing cybersickness may be associated with the individual participant, the VR/VE system used, or the task being performed in the VE. While advances in VR technology will resolve some of the system problems, other factors influencing cybersickness are more difficult to deal with, and due to individual differences in susceptibility some VE participants will continue to experience symptoms in only mildly provocative VEs. This makes cybersickness difficult to avoid and treat in all situations. Yet a thorough understanding of the problem allows for general awareness of potential adverse effects, as well as possible measures that can be taken to avoid or minimise them. Some specific measures have been recommended, but little research has been carried out and much is still needed. Stanney and Salvendy [1998] have recommended further research to gain an understanding of human adaptation to VEs, along with co-development between VE software and VR hardware to avoid growing sensory discordance problems that would lead to a greater need for adaptation and higher levels of cybersickness. Further research is needed in all areas, both basic and applied.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
It can probably be linked to global warming as well.
Watching standard 2d and not focusing yours eyes on various depths for long periods will also have similar bad effects. However, even when using my shutter glasses I still look around the room and view objects at different focal distances which may lessen the negative effects. I'll probably be playing the harp between the clouds before there is enough 3D source material to be overly concerned...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,110 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixie /forum/post/18833174


Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? ... Or maybe you fail basic geometry ... such an ignorant response that makes already refuted points contributes absolutely nothing and appears like little more than an attempt to muddy the argument, the best you can do when you fail to provide an actual logical counterargument!

This could be an interesting and relevant topic. But your overzealous posting style and apparent lack of respect when replying to others makes it difficult for me to read your posts subjectively.
 

·
Registered
HT Room: Atmos 7.1.4 with 117" 21:9 AT DYI screen & prism; Bedroom: Atmos 5.1.4 with 55" OLED
Joined
·
879 Posts
This study concentrates mostly on VR solution, where the display is really close to the eye (HMD or individual screens).


There is a very basic problem with stereoscopy and physical distance to the display. The stereoscopic images simulate different depths of the objects to the brain. The brain tells the eyes to focus at that perceived distance. But, the eye needs to focus onto the display, at a fixed distance.


The brain need a while to get used to this disconnect, and to reverse this once it's looking at the real world again. This can cause headaches. This effect is most severe for HMDs, where the perceived and physical distances differ a lot, and least severe in movie theaters, where the screen is at an almost infinite focal depth for the human eye. So, for home 3D viewing, the stress should be less fo larger displays at a greater distance to the viewer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixie /forum/post/18833174


Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? Did you miss the part of the paper quote that says "The problem is not limited to HMDs as ANY stereoscopic display, from a stereoscopic desktop to immersive systems such as the CAVE, uses the same display method"?


Or maybe you fail basic geometry, since convergence is an angular measure, not distance!! A stereo image 1" from the eyes uses a much lower horizontal separation than does one on a screen few feet in front, yet both would have the same angular separation for the same 3D effect.


Or maybe you failed to read the part that says that the issue is "accommodation-vergence cross-links", which has no **** to do with distance from your eyes, but with the very thing I've been talking about from the first post!


Apologies for all the exclamation marks, but such an ignorant response that makes already refuted points contributes absolutely nothing and appears like little more than an attempt to muddy the argument, the best you can do when you fail to provide an actual logical counterargument!
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top